XML Desktop config files (was: Re: Tons of questions. And some patches
raabe at kde.org
Mon Jan 26 14:36:16 GMT 2004
On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 03:08:26PM +0100, Dr. Juergen Pfennig wrote:
> On Monday 26 January 2004 13:50, Frerich Raabe wrote:
> > I can recommend using libxml++'s (very nice C++ bindings for libxml) SAX
> > interface.
> Sure it's faster. It's plain c (or++) code and won't internally use QString.
> But - here comes a QUESTION:
> KConfig lives in kdecore. Using libxml on this "low" level might cause an
> unwanted dependecy on a non-KDE library. Would this be acceptable?
> As a 3rd alternative one could dare to implement a hand-crafted xml parser. As
> long as we would deny the use of namespaces and CDATA sections in xml this
> would not be too much work.
Hmm this is getting a scary spin IMHO. What's wrong with INI files which
justify such an effort and the inevitable headache caused by all kinds of
Frans' original mail only mentioned "AFAICT there is clear advantages of
having desktop files in a XML format", but did not get around to actually
You go even further and spend time on investigating this, but I don't see
your reasons for this either. The only comment which made me believe that
you're not just bored was "I believe that KDE on the Company desktop would"
"have to cooperate with popular configuration management tools.". What are
these popular configuration management tools, and how to they affect KDE?
I have this odd sensation that you're making up the problems you attempt to
solve yourselves. Demand creation at it's best.
More information about the kde-core-devel